NOTE: This model has not been backtested for historical accuracy. We publish it in large part to give an idea of stylistic trends that can be expected (fast/slow, one team dominating the boards and the other shooting a lot of threes, etc).

Box Score Projection

Scoring FUR COFC
Points 78.2 83.9
Total Points   162.1
Points From 2-Pointers 35.8 42.8
Points From 3-Pointers 30.1 28.3
Points From Free Throws 12.4 12.8
Shooting FUR COFC
Field Goals Made 27.9 30.8
Field Goals Attempted 61.7 64.7
Field Goal % 45.2% 47.7%
2 Pointers Made 17.9 21.4
2 Pointers Attempted 32.6 37.7
2 Point Shooting % 54.9% 56.8%
3 Pointers Made 10.0 9.4
3 Pointers Attempted 29.1 27.0
3 Point Shooting % 34.4% 35.0%
Free Throws Made 12.4 12.8
Free Throws Attempted 17.1 17.6
Free Throw % 72.6% 72.3%
Ball Control FUR COFC
Rebounds 34.2 38.5
Rebounds - Defensive 25.5 27.5
Rebounds - Offensive 8.7 11.0
Turnovers 10.1 8.6
Blocked Shots 2.5 3.6
Steals 5.6 6.0
Fouls 14.1 13.3

Playing Style Advantage: Furman

Expected Effect: +0.6 points
Our simulation model uses tempo-free statistics to project a detailed box score for this game. This analysis also indicates which team (if any) is expected to gain a relative advantage based on the specific matchup of paces and playing styles.

NOTE: Our simulation model assumes a neutral court setting.

Tempo-Free Projection

Possession Stats FUR COFC
Total Possessions 73.2
Effective Scoring Chances 71.8 75.6
% of Possessions with FUR COFC
2 Point Attempt 39.1% 44.2%
3 Point Attempt 35.0% 31.7%
Player Fouled 18.1% 19.3%
Turnover 13.7% 11.8%
Opponent Steal 8.1% 7.6%
Odds Per Shot Taken FUR COFC
Shot Blocked 5.6% 4.1%
Offensive Rebound 24.0% 30.2%